Sometimes a job calls on you to go above and beyond your normal routine. For a model, this can happen quite often. In the case of IAM: Rachietartz, her latest photoshoot pushed her to the brink of consciousness. Using a tie to cut off her airway, Rachie was on the verge of passing out when this photo was snapped. You can see just how intense this was not only by the look in her eyes, but also by how red her face got while she was straining for air.
Photo credit: JL Joseph Beaulieu
Comments
270 responses to “Begging for air”
arright lol at all these comments. lol at choking. lol at very little being accomplished at discussing this image with complete strangers. its times like these where i feel the people of this modern world will not change their opinion no matter what they hear other people say. we as humans are way to stubborn. either you like this image or you dont.
fuck the rest.
@ Davo: this concept isn’t that complex. What “some people” would call the website is irrelevant. It is advertised and marketed as a place for “tattoo, piercing, and body modification news”. If a minority receives some sort of stimulation from that then it’s a personal issue, but that is not what the site purports to be about. Someone receiving sexual arousal from content without sexual intent is an unintended side effect. Someone receiving sexual arousal from content that is inherently sexual in nature is fetishist content. Modblog is NOT a “sex fetish” website–period.
@ Davo: this concept isn’t that complex. What “some people” would call the website is irrelevant. It is advertised and marketed as a place for “tattoo, piercing, and body modification news”. If a minority receives some sort of stimulation from that then it’s a personal issue, but that is not what the site purports to be about. Someone receiving sexual arousal from content without sexual intent is an unintended side effect. Someone receiving sexual arousal from content that is inherently sexual in nature is fetishist content. Modblog is NOT a “sex fetish” website–period.
@ Davo: this concept isn’t that complex. What “some people” would call the website is irrelevant. It is advertised and marketed as a place for “tattoo, piercing, and body modification news”. If a minority receives some sort of stimulation from that then it’s a personal issue, but that is not what the site purports to be about. Someone receiving sexual arousal from content without sexual intent is an unintended side effect. Someone receiving sexual arousal from content that is inherently sexual in nature is fetishist content. Modblog is NOT a “sex fetish” website–period.
Colleen is on the maf’kin money, people! The point IS NOT about the impressionable nature of children. If they’re here reading this website, it’s probably a better option than the myriad other websites that actually DO encourage damaging behaviours. ModBlog does no such thing. Any encouragement that one gleans from ModBlog posts would be entirely subjective and not something one could argue with any real certainty.
The real point, however, is one of policy. For a professional, money-making family of websites, BME/IAM/ModBlog should have a very clear set of guidelines for what can and can’t be considered “body modification” when it comes to the content it showcases. Auto-erotic asphyxiation isn’t, in and of itself, a form of body modification. It’s a sexual preference or behaviour. There’s no modification aspect to it.
If, however, the photo is being showcased because the subject of the photograph has two piercings, then we need to initiate dialogue, as a community, around what is and isn’t appropriate for ModBlog based on this. Would it be appropriate for me to send in photos of a subject abusing animals so long as that person had visible tattoos or piercings? Perhaps that is a little extreme. Another example then: Would it be okay for me to send in photos of me writing a critical analysis of James Joyce’s ‘A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man’ so long as you can see some of my tattoos? Is ModBlog about literary criticism? NO.
Think about it.
Colleen is on the maf’kin money, people! The point IS NOT about the impressionable nature of children. If they’re here reading this website, it’s probably a better option than the myriad other websites that actually DO encourage damaging behaviours. ModBlog does no such thing. Any encouragement that one gleans from ModBlog posts would be entirely subjective and not something one could argue with any real certainty.
The real point, however, is one of policy. For a professional, money-making family of websites, BME/IAM/ModBlog should have a very clear set of guidelines for what can and can’t be considered “body modification” when it comes to the content it showcases. Auto-erotic asphyxiation isn’t, in and of itself, a form of body modification. It’s a sexual preference or behaviour. There’s no modification aspect to it.
If, however, the photo is being showcased because the subject of the photograph has two piercings, then we need to initiate dialogue, as a community, around what is and isn’t appropriate for ModBlog based on this. Would it be appropriate for me to send in photos of a subject abusing animals so long as that person had visible tattoos or piercings? Perhaps that is a little extreme. Another example then: Would it be okay for me to send in photos of me writing a critical analysis of James Joyce’s ‘A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man’ so long as you can see some of my tattoos? Is ModBlog about literary criticism? NO.
Think about it.
Colleen is on the maf’kin money, people! The point IS NOT about the impressionable nature of children. If they’re here reading this website, it’s probably a better option than the myriad other websites that actually DO encourage damaging behaviours. ModBlog does no such thing. Any encouragement that one gleans from ModBlog posts would be entirely subjective and not something one could argue with any real certainty.
The real point, however, is one of policy. For a professional, money-making family of websites, BME/IAM/ModBlog should have a very clear set of guidelines for what can and can’t be considered “body modification” when it comes to the content it showcases. Auto-erotic asphyxiation isn’t, in and of itself, a form of body modification. It’s a sexual preference or behaviour. There’s no modification aspect to it.
If, however, the photo is being showcased because the subject of the photograph has two piercings, then we need to initiate dialogue, as a community, around what is and isn’t appropriate for ModBlog based on this. Would it be appropriate for me to send in photos of a subject abusing animals so long as that person had visible tattoos or piercings? Perhaps that is a little extreme. Another example then: Would it be okay for me to send in photos of me writing a critical analysis of James Joyce’s ‘A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man’ so long as you can see some of my tattoos? Is ModBlog about literary criticism? NO.
Think about it.
ModBlog may not be a sex/fetish site, but BMEHard can be, and sometimes things from BMEHard are posted on Modblog.
Also, that picture wouldn’t have been posted if she had no piercings.
ModBlog may not be a sex/fetish site, but BMEHard can be, and sometimes things from BMEHard are posted on Modblog.
Also, that picture wouldn’t have been posted if she had no piercings.
ModBlog may not be a sex/fetish site, but BMEHard can be, and sometimes things from BMEHard are posted on Modblog.
Also, that picture wouldn’t have been posted if she had no piercings.
and most of the females lately have been posted with very minimal mods at all. thats not what modblog was created for. it RARELY had pictures of females for the fact of them being naked, but about their mods…
like ive been saying… fap collection is what this has turned into.
and most of the females lately have been posted with very minimal mods at all. thats not what modblog was created for. it RARELY had pictures of females for the fact of them being naked, but about their mods…
like ive been saying… fap collection is what this has turned into.
and most of the females lately have been posted with very minimal mods at all. thats not what modblog was created for. it RARELY had pictures of females for the fact of them being naked, but about their mods…
like ive been saying… fap collection is what this has turned into.
I rarely post on here anymore but I know this “photographer” and he is a total fucking CREEP… and the last thing I expected to see on modblog. Seeing this makes me feel sick. Shame on you for posting this. As a long time member of iam (since 2002) I’m ashamed of what iam, bme, and modblog have become. Over it.
I rarely post on here anymore but I know this “photographer” and he is a total fucking CREEP… and the last thing I expected to see on modblog. Seeing this makes me feel sick. Shame on you for posting this. As a long time member of iam (since 2002) I’m ashamed of what iam, bme, and modblog have become. Over it.
I rarely post on here anymore but I know this “photographer” and he is a total fucking CREEP… and the last thing I expected to see on modblog. Seeing this makes me feel sick. Shame on you for posting this. As a long time member of iam (since 2002) I’m ashamed of what iam, bme, and modblog have become. Over it.
I’d like to point out I have been featured many times. And not just because “OH, I HAVE FACIAL PIERCINGS!” I have been featured for my tattoos, tongue splitting, and waist training in the past, thank you very much. I’m not just some dumbass with facial piercings hoping to be featured.
Also Jon P, sending in photos of a subject abusing animals so long as that person had visible tattoos or piercings? Haha. That is illegal and would undoubtedly have modblog or BME shut down in a heart beat if the wrong people saw it. Cruelty to animals is illegal if you didn’t know.
I’d like to point out I have been featured many times. And not just because “OH, I HAVE FACIAL PIERCINGS!” I have been featured for my tattoos, tongue splitting, and waist training in the past, thank you very much. I’m not just some dumbass with facial piercings hoping to be featured.
Also Jon P, sending in photos of a subject abusing animals so long as that person had visible tattoos or piercings? Haha. That is illegal and would undoubtedly have modblog or BME shut down in a heart beat if the wrong people saw it. Cruelty to animals is illegal if you didn’t know.
I’d like to point out I have been featured many times. And not just because “OH, I HAVE FACIAL PIERCINGS!” I have been featured for my tattoos, tongue splitting, and waist training in the past, thank you very much. I’m not just some dumbass with facial piercings hoping to be featured.
Also Jon P, sending in photos of a subject abusing animals so long as that person had visible tattoos or piercings? Haha. That is illegal and would undoubtedly have modblog or BME shut down in a heart beat if the wrong people saw it. Cruelty to animals is illegal if you didn’t know.
Um, actually there have been news stories featured in the past with animals being pierced or tattooed. Let’s not forget that. Let’s also not forget that you’ve taken that slightly out of context as I myself said that example was probably too extreme.
It doesn’t matter that you’ve been profiled/featured in the past for your BOD MODS. This isn’t a bod mod. There’s no argument here about you as a person, so detach yourself a little bit from this and show some objectivity. The argument is around the relevance of the material posted.
How about addressing the second, less extreme and more relevant, example as you’ve already address the first, silly, example I made? I have had quite a bit of involvement on IAM in the past. That is not patting myself on the back, so let’s not take that statement out of context. If I was featured, say, sitting at a desk in the University library, writing an English Lit. essay and you could only just see a tiny part of my sleeve, but that wasn’t even mentioned, would that be a relevant ModBlog post?
I would reply in the negative, because it wouldn’t have anything to do with MODS but rather academia or literature or some such wanky thing (that I live for).
Bah, it’s played out. Done.
Um, actually there have been news stories featured in the past with animals being pierced or tattooed. Let’s not forget that. Let’s also not forget that you’ve taken that slightly out of context as I myself said that example was probably too extreme.
It doesn’t matter that you’ve been profiled/featured in the past for your BOD MODS. This isn’t a bod mod. There’s no argument here about you as a person, so detach yourself a little bit from this and show some objectivity. The argument is around the relevance of the material posted.
How about addressing the second, less extreme and more relevant, example as you’ve already address the first, silly, example I made? I have had quite a bit of involvement on IAM in the past. That is not patting myself on the back, so let’s not take that statement out of context. If I was featured, say, sitting at a desk in the University library, writing an English Lit. essay and you could only just see a tiny part of my sleeve, but that wasn’t even mentioned, would that be a relevant ModBlog post?
I would reply in the negative, because it wouldn’t have anything to do with MODS but rather academia or literature or some such wanky thing (that I live for).
Bah, it’s played out. Done.
Um, actually there have been news stories featured in the past with animals being pierced or tattooed. Let’s not forget that. Let’s also not forget that you’ve taken that slightly out of context as I myself said that example was probably too extreme.
It doesn’t matter that you’ve been profiled/featured in the past for your BOD MODS. This isn’t a bod mod. There’s no argument here about you as a person, so detach yourself a little bit from this and show some objectivity. The argument is around the relevance of the material posted.
How about addressing the second, less extreme and more relevant, example as you’ve already address the first, silly, example I made? I have had quite a bit of involvement on IAM in the past. That is not patting myself on the back, so let’s not take that statement out of context. If I was featured, say, sitting at a desk in the University library, writing an English Lit. essay and you could only just see a tiny part of my sleeve, but that wasn’t even mentioned, would that be a relevant ModBlog post?
I would reply in the negative, because it wouldn’t have anything to do with MODS but rather academia or literature or some such wanky thing (that I live for).
Bah, it’s played out. Done.
Extreme Animal abuse, gets you shut down. A.K.A. Gratuitous amounts of violence, torturing, and other stuff of the like to animals CAN get you’re website shut down. I’m a part of a forum for gore, murder, and crime scene photos. They will not only delete your post if you post something of the like, but they also ban you from the website because that crosses the line of legality.
And it happens.
Extreme Animal abuse, gets you shut down. A.K.A. Gratuitous amounts of violence, torturing, and other stuff of the like to animals CAN get you’re website shut down. I’m a part of a forum for gore, murder, and crime scene photos. They will not only delete your post if you post something of the like, but they also ban you from the website because that crosses the line of legality.
And it happens.
Extreme Animal abuse, gets you shut down. A.K.A. Gratuitous amounts of violence, torturing, and other stuff of the like to animals CAN get you’re website shut down. I’m a part of a forum for gore, murder, and crime scene photos. They will not only delete your post if you post something of the like, but they also ban you from the website because that crosses the line of legality.
And it happens.
this serious post is serious.
wow.
i think it’s a damn sexy photo, and that’s that. sure it’s not as relevant to body modification as a lot of other posts, but we’ve been seeing plenty of that for a long time now, bad time to start bitching. she’s an adult, rob is an adult, and one would think that most of the commenters are too, but i’m beginning to wonder if the majority of you really deserve that title.
this serious post is serious.
wow.
i think it’s a damn sexy photo, and that’s that. sure it’s not as relevant to body modification as a lot of other posts, but we’ve been seeing plenty of that for a long time now, bad time to start bitching. she’s an adult, rob is an adult, and one would think that most of the commenters are too, but i’m beginning to wonder if the majority of you really deserve that title.
this serious post is serious.
wow.
i think it’s a damn sexy photo, and that’s that. sure it’s not as relevant to body modification as a lot of other posts, but we’ve been seeing plenty of that for a long time now, bad time to start bitching. she’s an adult, rob is an adult, and one would think that most of the commenters are too, but i’m beginning to wonder if the majority of you really deserve that title.
Jon P, I concur! You’re bang on the money. What it boils down to is this is not related to modification but more mortification..
Jon P, I concur! You’re bang on the money. What it boils down to is this is not related to modification but more mortification..
Jon P, I concur! You’re bang on the money. What it boils down to is this is not related to modification but more mortification..
Rachie, I think this is a very beautiful picture and it kind of turned me on, which I suppose is part of the purpose. And I think you and everybody else totally has the right to do this kind of activity.
HOWEVER, I also know that breath play/choking is a very, very, very dangerous activity which is NEVER without any risk, even if you are in control of the tie yourself, you will lose that control the moment you pass out, for instance. There is no “safe” way to do breath play, it carries very high risks of brain damage and death.
Apart from the question if this is body modification or not, I think this picture should at least come with a HUGE caveat and warning!!!
Rachie, I think this is a very beautiful picture and it kind of turned me on, which I suppose is part of the purpose. And I think you and everybody else totally has the right to do this kind of activity.
HOWEVER, I also know that breath play/choking is a very, very, very dangerous activity which is NEVER without any risk, even if you are in control of the tie yourself, you will lose that control the moment you pass out, for instance. There is no “safe” way to do breath play, it carries very high risks of brain damage and death.
Apart from the question if this is body modification or not, I think this picture should at least come with a HUGE caveat and warning!!!
Rachie, I think this is a very beautiful picture and it kind of turned me on, which I suppose is part of the purpose. And I think you and everybody else totally has the right to do this kind of activity.
HOWEVER, I also know that breath play/choking is a very, very, very dangerous activity which is NEVER without any risk, even if you are in control of the tie yourself, you will lose that control the moment you pass out, for instance. There is no “safe” way to do breath play, it carries very high risks of brain damage and death.
Apart from the question if this is body modification or not, I think this picture should at least come with a HUGE caveat and warning!!!
This is trying to be sooo “Richard Kern”. And not doing a good job.
This has no place here.
This is trying to be sooo “Richard Kern”. And not doing a good job.
This has no place here.
This is trying to be sooo “Richard Kern”. And not doing a good job.
This has no place here.
This picture would be VERY triggering for anyone who has seen someone die/dead. Is a click-through warning so fucking hard or would that interfere with your bullshit art debate wankery?
And on a side note I’m getting the impression that a few of you are borderline necrophiles.
This picture would be VERY triggering for anyone who has seen someone die/dead. Is a click-through warning so fucking hard or would that interfere with your bullshit art debate wankery?
And on a side note I’m getting the impression that a few of you are borderline necrophiles.
This picture would be VERY triggering for anyone who has seen someone die/dead. Is a click-through warning so fucking hard or would that interfere with your bullshit art debate wankery?
And on a side note I’m getting the impression that a few of you are borderline necrophiles.
@ Me – Some people are turned on by choking other people. That does not mean they are necrophiliacs.
@ Me – Some people are turned on by choking other people. That does not mean they are necrophiliacs.
@ Me – Some people are turned on by choking other people. That does not mean they are necrophiliacs.
I want to start by saying wonderful photo Rachie. I am not into choking, and this doesnt turn me on at all, but I like it for its artistic value.
As for everyone bitching and complaining about it not being about modifications and it being dangerous, EVERYTHING ON THIS SITE IS DANGEROUS! Even the slightest body modification can carry risks. and yes, it is about modifications, I see piercings on her face, so quit complaining
I want to start by saying wonderful photo Rachie. I am not into choking, and this doesnt turn me on at all, but I like it for its artistic value.
As for everyone bitching and complaining about it not being about modifications and it being dangerous, EVERYTHING ON THIS SITE IS DANGEROUS! Even the slightest body modification can carry risks. and yes, it is about modifications, I see piercings on her face, so quit complaining
I want to start by saying wonderful photo Rachie. I am not into choking, and this doesnt turn me on at all, but I like it for its artistic value.
As for everyone bitching and complaining about it not being about modifications and it being dangerous, EVERYTHING ON THIS SITE IS DANGEROUS! Even the slightest body modification can carry risks. and yes, it is about modifications, I see piercings on her face, so quit complaining
never butt into this kind of shit but i have to say @me: you’re a victim-mongerer, and i think your hypothetical “what if this offends” mindset is reactionary and pathetic. the etiquette of asking for, and supplying, trigger warnings is meant to communicate empathy or communicate equality. failing that, it serves to legally protect the makers of the “offensive” content. what it is not meant for is legislate away anything one may find shocking or unpleasing. Yea, this might fucking trigger someone who saw someone die because SEEING PEOPLE DIE IS FUCKING TRAUMATIC. trigger warnings aren’t meant to pander to the lowest comfort level. goddamnit this pisses me off so much.
never butt into this kind of shit but i have to say @me: you’re a victim-mongerer, and i think your hypothetical “what if this offends” mindset is reactionary and pathetic. the etiquette of asking for, and supplying, trigger warnings is meant to communicate empathy or communicate equality. failing that, it serves to legally protect the makers of the “offensive” content. what it is not meant for is legislate away anything one may find shocking or unpleasing. Yea, this might fucking trigger someone who saw someone die because SEEING PEOPLE DIE IS FUCKING TRAUMATIC. trigger warnings aren’t meant to pander to the lowest comfort level. goddamnit this pisses me off so much.
never butt into this kind of shit but i have to say @me: you’re a victim-mongerer, and i think your hypothetical “what if this offends” mindset is reactionary and pathetic. the etiquette of asking for, and supplying, trigger warnings is meant to communicate empathy or communicate equality. failing that, it serves to legally protect the makers of the “offensive” content. what it is not meant for is legislate away anything one may find shocking or unpleasing. Yea, this might fucking trigger someone who saw someone die because SEEING PEOPLE DIE IS FUCKING TRAUMATIC. trigger warnings aren’t meant to pander to the lowest comfort level. goddamnit this pisses me off so much.
see? so pissed off i typo’d all over my rant.